Skip to main content

tv   Anderson Cooper 360  CNN  October 8, 2013 10:00pm-11:01pm PDT

10:00 pm
that's all for us tonight. ac 360 later starts right now. good evening, everyone. welcome to "ac 360 later." a lot on the table tonight to talk about with our panel. breaking news an off duty nypd detective arrested in connection with that attack on an suv driver by a group of bikers. also is it time for the washington redskins to dump their name? we begin with our other breaking news on day eight of the government shutdown there's a possible glimmer of hope for the other looming mess, the debt ceiling. with me on the panel tonight cnn international correspondent and christiane amanpour, jeffrey toob
10:01 pm
toobin. let's get the latest from dana bash. dana, what's this glimmer of hope? >> the glimmer of hope, i'm glad you emphasized maybe, maybe glimmer we'll see. because it really is unclear if this is going to get anywhere. but it is republicans in the house sort of latching onto what the president seemed to have opened the door to in his press conference today, which is perhaps a short-term increase of the debt ceiling. two senior republican sources in the house have now said, well, maybe that is something that they could agree. to to use that time, four to six weeks, maybe, to negotiate some of what republicans have been demanding or at least something that they could frankly take home to their constituents and say, see, we didn't just raise the debt ceiling for nothing, we got something that addresses the debt and deficit. who knows what that is. that's one of the big problems here. another big problem is that that information came to us and not directly to them. because they're not negotiating. they're not talking. and it is primarily because the president has made clear that he's not going to negotiate on this, and he wants to stick to that line.
10:02 pm
so republicans sources have to go through us to get to them. and they're using other means as well. >> dana, it's jeff here. can i ask you, what about the obama administration in terms of like four to six weeks, will they negotiate during that period? or will they then say again, we don't negotiate about the debt ceiling. so what does it four to six weeks accomplish other than ruining christmas? >> reporter: again. however many years in a row, what it would accomplish, perhaps, is a time for all sides to sit down and figure out parameters of issues that they can address. everybody has been talking about the big issues for years, really since republicans took over the house back in 2010. whether they can do that in four to six weeks, who knows. but the other big thing is that we don't even know if this is that much of a viable option, because again they're talking through us and through outside sources.
10:03 pm
>> which is no way to have a negotiation at all. >> no, not at all. >> we don't know what short term means. in a short term deal if that means a couple weeks or months and we're going to go through this all again. how many times are we going to go through this? >> i hate to sound like a broken record, but i have to say and the president said it today in his press conference, every time we go through this kind of thing, every time we do this our credibility is knocked abroad. and again, you've got really upstanding, not rags but the ft and others saying look here we have the u.s. again acting like "the great gatsby," being really careless, hurting the rest of the world, more than hurting themselves. china and japan, the landlord is calling. they want to make sure that america's not going to default on its debt. france is saying america's beginning to look like italy. >> i saw that column, yes. >> and where do house republicans go for this? because there's so much distrust, would they trust obama to -- would they trust the president to negotiate without a threat like this? >> well, i think they can work
10:04 pm
with it. they should be able to work within this frame and do it in a way -- you know, if you read in between the lines of what president obama said, he gave a little. >> what? but what did he give? >> he said, i will negotiate if you pass a clean c.r. i will negotiate. okay. now, he may not want to negotiate about the debt ceiling. he may not want to negotiate about the government shutdown without the clean c.r. so then they should negotiate about what they're going to negotiate if and when -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> that makes my head hurt just to hear you say that sentence. >> take two advil because it's not going away and this is a solution. >> i want to bring in republican congressman michael grimm joining us on capitol hill. congressman, thanks for being with us late at night. do you see a glimmer of hope here in what the president said today? >> michael's a new yorker.
10:05 pm
he's used to late nights. >> you're absolutely right about that. i am used to late nights. i think there is a glimmer of hope here. but it is going to take leadership from every side. listen. all of this has been coming to a head for awhile. this i three years in the making. it's a lot of things. i actually think that the fight isn't with republicans and the president on this one. i know a lot of people might disagree. but i think it's a lot about the fight is between the house and the senate. a lot of us feel that they're act, like the house of lords, that they have the upper chamber and they can dictator ignore us. and we've seen this with four years of no budgets and so forth, we can go on and on. i think this is about the house standing up and saying you're the going to dictate. we are going to force you to sit down to the table. we do want regular order. and i think there is a glimmer of hope, though. >> congressman, what you're saying is that hundreds of thousands of people are out of work. the government is shut down because you're offended by the senate? they're not nice to you? >> no, no, no, absolutely not. let me be very clear. that sound silly and i'm not going to let you frame the argument that way. this is very serious. when we don't fund our
10:06 pm
government properly, and we have c.r. after c.r., that's detrimental to the american people. when we're at a situation where we can't even talk to each other and facing the debt ceiling, that is detrimental to the american people. the president today said, we need to get back to a sense of normalcy. well, normalcy means passing appropriations bills. that's how we form -- and by the way, if we did that, we wouldn't be here tonight with a shut down government because there'd be no c.r. if we pass appropriations bills there's no need for a c.r. that's how our government is funded. that's how the department of defense needs to be funded. that's the way things should be done. if you're constantly ignored, if they table everything or don't take it up the house has to act. here's to add one other thing to this. the idea that we don't use a debt ceiling or a crisis to get things done is simply absurd. unfortunately on both sides of the aisle there is not the political courage to do the tough things like deal with entitlements. anyone that disagrees with that doesn't know our history. anytime we've got something of substance done has been in a
10:07 pm
crisis. >> let me ask you, though. what i don't understand strategically, why shouldn't the republicans allow a c.r., clean c.r. to come up for a vote? because the republicans are saying the votes aren't there. the votes aren't there. if that's really true, why not let it come to a vote and take away that argument from the democrats? because the democrats are continuing to hammer that argument. if there's not the votes there why not let it come up and fail? >> well, one of the problems you're asking the wrong guy because i didn't think that the fight should have been on the c.r. i was for a clean c.r. i think that the level of sequestration -- >> you're willing to -- >> i'm one of those that did not want a shut down in the first place. i thought sequester levels was a win for republicans and we should have taken the fight to the debt ceiling where it belongs where you actually have a valid point to say if we don't have reforms, then we're going to have a debt crisis in the future. let's be responsible. let's do the difficult thing and actually do some reforms and avoid a real debt crisis where
10:08 pm
we don't have the luxury of just raising our debt ceiling because no one will buy our debt in the first place. >> anna, why not take that off the table? why not put it up to a vote? republicans are saying why shouldn't we? why shouldn't you? >> for the same reason that harry reid won't put up the repeal of the medical device up for a vote. because the votes are there to pass it but they're a majority of the other party. you want to talk truth? that's what it is. are the votes there to pass a c.r. but it will be the majority of democrats in the house. >> shut down the government? >> harry reid is doing exactly the same thing on the senate side, and you guys are just not seeing it. >> but that's the law. that's the existing law right now. you want to see a change, perhaps other people want to see a change. but as i understand the way the american government is supposed to work, you don't shut down the entire government because you want one tax change. >> but this is exactly what the negotiation about the negotiation that makes your head explode could be about, okay? let's sit down and say, okay. these are the things that are going to be brought for an up or
10:09 pm
down vote in the house and in the senate, including things like the medical device tax, in exchange of us passing a c.r. for three weeks or four weeks. i mean, how does that sound to you, mike? >> no, i absolutely agree with you. listen. there's obviously a political element to this. but another bad precedent being set here when the president of the united states when both sides dig in is supposed to play that vital role of saying let's figure something out. if he walks away completely that certainly doesn't help the united states look good on the international stages. he's the leader whether he wants to be or not. he has to bring us together. >> you'd like to seat president of the united states every 90 days for the rest of his term negotiate about the debt ceiling? that's what you're saying. you're saying over and over again let's do a short-term thing. >> that's not what he said. >> how can you function that way? >> i never once said i want to do a short-term debt ceiling. it was just put out before that
10:10 pm
harry reid said he wants to go to december 2014 on the debt ceiling. i'm not necessarily opposed to that. that's obviously a political ask because we don't need to go to december 2014. if he wants to sweeten the pot i would say okay what's in it for republicans? are we going to put keystone pipeline in the package? some other things that republicans have asked for? that's how this works. if you think that this country hasn't been built on horse trading and each side giving, then again you just haven't been paying attention to history. that's the way it's done. [ overlapping speakers ] >> one at a time. >> michael comes from staten island, a purple district. this is what you're hearing, you're hearing a man who needs to compromise in order to represent his district or he won't get elected. >> compromise to run the country, to run the government. >> to say the president walked away i don't think is fair. you can make many criticisms with the way the president has dealt with congress over time. many of them are fair. he's not walking away. he's saying i won't be dragged to the brink, threatened
10:11 pm
with cataclysm and then give a contention. he's saying if you want to negotiate, let's do it in the proper context. but if every time extreme threats are made i'll say i give you this it's going to set a precedent not only for this presidency but for everyone who comes after. i think that's a fair point of his, don't you? >> well, then, i guess i have a question. what president has ever not negotiated on the debt ceiling? which president has taken that stance he won't negotiate with the debt ceiling? i don't know of any. >> what president has been threatened several times with default. actually, this is a unique situation. we have not had a president serially threatened with the country going into default. unless he did what a minority of people in one of the chambers of congress want. >> if you look at prior debt ceiling negotiations, the president negotiated all the way through up until that point an didn't have to be threatened. there was never a president that came out and said my way or the highway or said i will not negotiate. so you're changing the facts of history to fit your argument.
10:12 pm
and it simply isn't going to work. >> guys, the reason that president obama today opened the door a crack is because we are in a government shutdown, is because of the threats, it's because of what the public -- the stress and the public disappointment. >> it's because he's the president and he has to take ultimate responsibility. it's also because you can all read opinion polls. right now the american public hates everybody. we argue do they hate democrats more or republicans more. when i read those polls they hate everybody. there's a whole new yard stick for judging people in government, it goes not from odious to excellent but to bearable. the president was trying to stay in bearable or get a little above bearable. >> can we ask the question, though? what is the purpose of a debt limit? if we're always going to rubber-stamp it, if it's never a mechanism to force reforms when needed then what's the purpose of it? [ overlapping speakers ] >> we shouldn't have -- most
10:13 pm
countries, virtually every country in the world doesn't have a legal debt limit, end of story. shouldn't have one. >> okay. so then what you're saying is we should never address our long term debt. the only way in today's political world -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> but then why hasn't it been addressed for the last three years? you tell me what democrat proposal came forward. you might not like paul ryan's budget. you may disagree with things. i disagree in his budget. but he had the courage to step forward and attempt to deal with our long-term debt. >> let me give you the final thought. >> we have not been serious about the debt in this country. i want to make very clear you're absolutely right. i would like to see washington deal with that debt but this is not the way to do it. not the context. >> then tell me what the way is. >> you don't do it on the edge of cataclysm. >> how do you do it? >> negotiate budgets in a normal way, not one chamber refuse to go to conference or write a budget for years.
10:14 pm
>> congressman grimm, good to have you on again. when we come back, words about the government shutdown. one word we're hearing a lot is "hostage." why each side is accusing the other of taking them hostage, we'll be right back. people don't have to think about where their electricity comes from. they flip the switch-- and the light comes on. it's our job to make sure that it does. using natural gas this power plant can produce enough energy for about 600,000 homes. generating electricity that's cleaner and reliable, with fewer emissions-- it matters. ♪
10:15 pm
make my mark i wawith pride.ork. create moments of value. build character through quality. and earn the right to be called a classic. the lands' end no iron dress shirt. starting at 49 dollars.
10:16 pm
progressive direct and other car insurance companies? yes. but you're progressive, and they're them. yes. but they're here. yes. are you...? there? yes. no. are you them? i'm me. but those rates are for... them. so them are here. yes! you want to run through it again? no, i'm good. you got it? yes. rates for us and them -- now that's progressive.
10:17 pm
call or click today. tweet us using #ac360.
10:18 pm
glimmer of hope for the looming debt crisis. dana bash reporting republicans may agree if the republicans negotiate during that time. it's incredibly hostile. some lawmakers tossing hitler and holocaust analogies around, one comparing it to the attempt to take flight 93 back on 9/11. "let's roll" he said. and both sides carrying on a verbal love affair with the word hostage. let's listen. >> you do not hold people hostage or engage in ransom taking to get 100% of your way. >> they're trying to hold veterans hostage to force obama care on the american people. >> you cannot negotiate with a hostage situation. >> we've got a group of folks who think that they can hold america hostage. >> the president somehow wants to keep this hostage. >> they've taken hostages. >> no president should be held
10:19 pm
hostage. >> holding our government hostage. >> holding the u.s. hostage. >> hold the entire country hostage. >> hold them hostage. >> don't hold anyone hostage. >> they took hostages. >> hostage taking. >> stop taking hostages. >> they had to take the country hostage. >> back with our panel again, the fifth chair "new york times" op ed columnist has been writing recently about all the trash talking. since many of the top figures in the standoff seem so fond of "hostage." we thought we'd bring in lead fbi international negotiating director. chris i've heard you say when you were actually negotiating with a hostage taker or hostage takers, you should try to identify the one who you can actually maybe get some sort of actual negotiation with and empower them. explain that. >> well, you find a person whose position is closest to yours or may possibly be the most reasonable then you make a small concession. small concessions to try to get big gains in return for your
10:20 pm
side is a mark of a shrewd negotiating. so you pick out who you want to make a small concession to and make that concession. they become empowered. they look good to their side because their side needs victories. then you begin to get some organization instilled in the other side around the person you'd like to deal with. >> whether or not it's correct to kind of use the "hostage" terms by politicians, when you see this as somebody who's negotiated a lot, when you see what's going on in washington what jumps out to you? >> well, there's two things about that. on a personal note, i like that they use the word because it gives me a chance to be on your show [ laughter ] >> but other thing that's fascinating about it, we teach hostage negotiators never to use word. one of them is "hostage." so no seasoned hostage negotiator would ever use that word because it's an emotional -- it's hurling a accusation. it triggers emotions in sort of an uncontrollable way. you don't like the way that word rebounds and resonates. we have a saying that if the
10:21 pm
words that you're getting ready to say you know how good they're going to taste when they roll off your lips, they're probably wrong. and they're not following that rule in this case. >> so you don't want to say to somebody who has taken a hostage, you don't want to use the h word to them. >> we refer to it as the h word. we absolutely would not use it. >> what do you say to them? what do you use a negotiate word? >> well, conversation. i mean, negotiation is a dirty word if you consider it capitulation. >> you would say what? >> conversation, communication. we've always coached government officials to say we're open to talking to anybody just to get a dialogue started. you can negotiate with people. you can also negotiate against people. if you look at it as a way to gather information and a way to gather influence, negotiation can be a very strong thing.
10:22 pm
that's the way i look at it. >> frank, how do you see all the rhetoric that's flying around? >> what the gentleman was saying very rightly when you use loaded words you raise the temperature of a situation rather than lowering it. what i think is happening in washington with a lot of the words that are used is it just raises the temperature. i don't have the biggest problem with "hostage." it's fairly calm in terms of the words going on. when i was watching the intro i thought what washington need right now is a thesaurus. they have to come up with another word. >> what you're seeing is political talking points in action from both parties. but do i have a problem with the word "hostage." >> we've talked about people having guns to their head. that's even worse. >> i don't like seeing elected politicians and officials asking for more civilly in washington are the same ones that are using words like this. today senator cardin, a democrat from maryland, talked about the gun that was being held at the senate or president obama's head.
10:23 pm
well, you're in an interview tomorrow, why don't you ask olalla if she thinks it's appropriate to use that. [ overlapping speakers ] >> i haven't been able to focus on anything. his company is called the black swan group. that is the baddest ass name i have ever heard. what is the black swan group? what is that? >> thank you very much. a black swan is something unusual that has a great impact. we like to think that the way we negotiate has a great impact. >> very cool, right? oh, man. >> frankly, what congress and the administration need to do is realize that they are not hostages, what they are is a marriage, okay? the white house, the president cannot do anything without the help of congress. congress can't do anything if the president doesn't sign it into law. so they should forget this hostage taking mum bow jumbo, call in marriage counselors, bring in dr. phil, bring in oprah and get on with fixing your very bad marriage. >> what interesting language to use.
10:24 pm
>> you hear 9/11 references made, nazi references made all the time. gestapo, third reich, all of that. just today stewart stephens, romney's campaign manager wrote an interesting piece in "the daily beast" about democrats who engage in this too call republicans murderers when they come out against food stamps or call republicans racist anytime they oppose anything that the president suggests. these are really loaded words. when you use language to vilify your opponents you begin to see each other as villians. there's never going to be conversation that way and there's certainly never going to be a resolution to this situation. >> many of us have grown up rightly to be sensitized about using nazi words. and holocaust and all of that. we just don't fling those around. if we did that in our job, jeff, we'd be taken to task, flogged all over the world. >> a little too fastidious here. if you look back at john
10:25 pm
edwards -- weird slip there. john adams. john adams and thomas jefferson were calling each other criminals. >> criminal is one thing. >> murderers. i'm a little less worried about the language. >> long proud tradition? >> long proud tradition. >> i disagree. there are certain limits, really. >> they call them those things but did it ping around with the velocity today? >> no, no. >> with the social media today with, the hyped up speed of the media, i think those words end up kind of attaining a velocity. >> hashtags in the elections of 1800 were so vicious. >> well, that's a great point. >> you desensitize people from the serious meaning of those words and the serious things that happened. there's a reason why we're not able to fling that stuff around with impunity. >> you make the polarization in america more. >> exactly, you are -- >> as a negotiator, where do you see this going?
10:26 pm
where do you see -- i mean, ultimately, is this two sides having to give? >> well, unfortunately some people think that the mark of a good deal is that both sides are unhappy. i'd like to see them do better than that. but they'll hopefully take some gains and they'll appreciate the gains that they've made, and then they'll be able to recalibrate and figure a way to get to a more common goal. >> one of the things that maybe chris said or somebody else said was this notion of unconditional surrender and what is a negotiation. the idea of compromise has simply gone out of the window from all sides. and it's one thing that this is happening and it's a real crisis. but it's also reflective in foreign policy and negotiations. let's say with iran's nuclear program, right? if there's no attempt to compromise and everybody's just going to be demanding unconditional surrender it's just not going to work. so you can take it from the government shutdown and to these
10:27 pm
other things that the united states has to deal with. >> twitter following rather than to actually good policy. >> yeah. chris, great to have you on. we'll see if the government can call in black swan on this. up next, major arrest in the bikers versus suv clash. a stunning arrest really here new york. we'll tell you about it ahead.
10:28 pm
10:29 pm
10:30 pm
welcome back. breaking news in the investigation of that violent confrontation between a group of motorcyclists and the driver of an suv.
10:31 pm
an off duty undercover new york police detective riding with the bikers has been arrested and charged with riot and criminal mischief. law enforcement tells cnn he was caught on video pounding on the range rover when it came to a stop on the street. also another man charged with joining. joining us defense attorney mark geragos and sunny hostin, former new york city prosecutor. >> i love how the story is unfolding. we said a couple of days ago, geez, ways giving prosecutors all kinds of credit. not rushing to judgment. then yesterday we said the rumor is there's a bunch of cops out there. today they arrest one of the cops. my feeling is that the only reason they didn't come in and arrest a bunch of people is because they knew early on that there were cops involved. >> but apparently the police did not fess up right away that they had been there. >> these undercover officers i
10:32 pm
think one it took him three days to come forward. >> after his video showed up. >> right. basically he's saying i didn't want to blow my cover. i just think that's absolutely ridiculous. i work with undercover agents. i'm sure you have as well, toobin. the bottom line is you can still be a human being without blowing your cover and get in between an assailant and victim and say let's all let cooler heads prevail. >> you know where this thing is headed? it's headed where the cops are going to say where they thought this guy had done -- they were apprehending a suspect. and that's why he was banging. >> the police officer could make the argument i saw this guy run over somebody. >> hit-and-run. >> what is the argument? >> the argument is going to be, the only place this cop can go, he's on there banging on the car. what i said early on. if they think this suv driver was hitting and running they were apprehending somebody, that's why he was banging on the car. >> you said early on, mark geragos, the suv driver should be arrested and indicted. are you still there?
10:33 pm
>> understand something, i know you're an suv driver on the west side highway. but understand something, this guy can be and most likely in any other jurisdiction would be charged with a hit and run. it is a defense for him to say it was coercion, duress, fear. that's a defense. it's not up to the prosecutor to analyze that at the get-go until they've drilled down and figured out facts. >> you're saying anywhere else he would have been arrested. >> anywhere else they would have arrested first and asked questions later. >> mark you seriously think they should have arrested the driver? >> he's serious, jeffrey toobin. >> the driver is by definition committing a hit-and-run. >> what about the guy whose assaulted him? >> they get arrested also and they sort it out. that's the frustrating -- >> oh, my -- >> self-defense, please. >> sunny, you are assuming right
10:34 pm
now that the video tells the whole story. you don't know that. what you do know is that the video shows that the suv is running over a motorcyclist and then accelerating out of there. now, yes, when they bash the car and pull him out, does that give everybody who drives the suv -- >> another report tonight reported an attorney for the motorcyclist who actually had the helmet cam and videotaped this claims that the suv driver that he turned on the video and the suv driver opened up the sunroof and he threw a water bottle out that lit one of the motorcyclists. now, we don't know why that would have occurred, if something occurred between them before, if he was feeling threatened or what. >> that upsets the narrative we have right now. the narrative right now is bike gang bangers who were surrounding this poor guy who's got a 2-year-old in the car and the media has just rushed to judgment on it. >> those are the facts.
10:35 pm
those are the facts. >> there's nobody who's out there questioning whether or not -- >> have you been surrounded ever by a gang? >> yes, i have been surrounded by a mob. >> it's one of the worst places and it's terrifying. >> i have also seen people who have been lynch mobbed with words like that. and it's terrible when there's a rush to judgment as well. >> what is the police involvement? what do you think? >> it's hard to tell at this point. but i really believe that you have some officers that were motorcycle riders. [ overlapping speakers ] >> that got involved in this. >> the report says this was not an undercover operation but motorcycle enthusiasts taking part in this. >> and all of a sudden these cops just decided i'm going to throw my career away, i'm going to beat on this guy's car, because i think i'm crazy? >> i see your argument. the police officer could argue wait a mini believe it was a hit-and-run driver and i was banging on the window to get
10:36 pm
them to stop. >> exactly what the case of this defense is going to be, i was apprehending a fleeing felon. >> he can also argue i was banging on the window to get them out of the vehicle and protect them. >> that's what's going to be here. the video stops just like rodney king, too early and too late. for both sides. >> which is very suspicious that the video happens to stop. i'm understanding from what i've read in the times that the police are suspicious about why the camera operator turned the camera off. camera operator's lawyer said there was a battery problem. he turned it off. but i mean as soon as they start pulling him out and boating him that's when it turns off. >> i'm going to suggest the possibility that both the person who was driving the suv and most of the bicyclists or motorcycle enthusiasts whatever you want to call them, both thought they were doing the right thing. i don't think this is the gang bang whatever that everybody has made it out to. >> it is assault you know that. you said four days ago this was not a gang situation. and i still disagree with that. i think there's very clear this
10:37 pm
is group mentality. this is not a motorcycle bike swarm. this is a motorcycle gang. they've been charged with gang assault. >> but it's not an actual gang. >> what is an actual gang? what is that? >> gang is the hell's angels or gang that actually has a place. i would assume. [ overlapping speakers ] >> they meet the definition. >> you have to meet a definition of what a gang is. you know that. this is not necessarily the definition of a gang. >> so the charge is wrong now? the charge is wrong? >> it's up to the jury to decide. what i'm telling you before we convict these people and say this is what it is and everybody kind of chimes in in the media that it's obvious this poor suv driver, he may be a poor suv driver. i'm not denying that. i'm saying at the same time this could very well be a situation where both sides perceive something completely at odds with each other. >> it's also not a question of two sides. it's a question of 40 different sides. because each of those riders could argue the piece that they saw justifies their behavior.
10:38 pm
>> and not every motorcyclist was banging on the window. >> right. >> so some of them probably were just driving along and were not involved in any criminal activity. mark, i guess the thing they find puzzling about your position is, what would possess a guy driving an suv with a kid in the back to start committing crimes in a way that dish mean, it just seems unlikely. >> i'm not saying he was committing crimes. what i'm saying -- understand my position. this guy is driving an suv. there's bikes out there. he either comes too close, swerves into a bike, somebody thinks that he's driving crazy. we've already -- and i base that on one of the bikers who's already given an interview who seemed very credible to me when i saw him. he says this guy was driving crazy. they think he's then trying to hit people. they think they're coming to try and slow him down. the guy who was in front of him going like this was trying to get him to slow down, pull over,
10:39 pm
you're driving crazy. next thing you know, this guy who's in the suv thinks, oh, my god, i'm being surrounded. freaks out, runs him over and goes. >> they start spiking his tires. they start assaulting him. >> they tried to open up his window and car door. >> that's assault. >> i still believe based on what i've seen, based on the motorcyclists that the motorcyclists thought this guy was hitting bikes and we're trying to apprehend him. >> does that justify the criminal behavior? >> the criminal behavior when you say pull him out and beat him up? i said this the other night. it reminds me is when they caught the night stalker richard ramirez in east l.a. they pulled him out of his car, they beat the holy sin out of him until the cops got there. >> that's apples and elephants. come on. >> i'm not justifying it. >> night stalker. >> the good is you're going to be debating this for weeks and months. >> it's a fascinating case. i think everybody can put
10:40 pm
themselves certainly in the position of the suv driver, even the motorcyclists in some case. coming up what's in a name? for the washington redskins a lot of trouble. is it time for them to drop a name that many native men's find very offensive? president obama has weighed in our panel does the same next.
10:41 pm
[ thunder crashes ] [ female announcer ] some people like to pretend a flood could never happen to them. and that their homeowners insurance protects them. [ thunder crashes ] it doesn't. stop pretending. only flood insurance covers floods. ♪ visit to learn your risk.
10:42 pm
"stubborn love" by the lumineers did you i did. email? so what did you think of the house? did you see the school ratings? oh, you're right. hey babe, i got to go. bye daddy! have a good day at school, ok? ...but what about when my parents visit? ok. i just love this one... and it's next to a park. i love it. i love it too. here's our new house... daddy! you're not just looking for a house. you're looking for a place for your life to happen. store and essentially they just get sold something. we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. before you invest in a mattress, discover the bed clinically proven to improve sleep quality. when we actually lower the sleep number setting to
10:43 pm
get the sleep number bed to conform to them, it's amazing the transition that you see with people. oh, that feels really good. it's hugging my body. they just look at you like you cured all the problems they've ever had. we hear it all the time: "i didn't know a bed could feel like this." oh yeah. you can have comfort and you can be in the same bed. i can adjust mine to my liking and she can do the same. the sleep number bed is more than just a mattress. you sleep on it, you'll understand. during the sleep number columbus day event, save $500 to $700 on the final closeout of our performance series mattress sets. but hurry-ends soon! only at one of our 425 sleep number stores nationwide, where queen mattresses start at just $699.99. sleep number. comfort individualized. new developments tonight in the u.s. relationship with
10:44 pm
egypt. jim sciutto joins us. what have you learned? >> let's be very precise here, about significant developments tonight. just to start, the white house has released a statement this evening saying that an announcement will come in the coming days on u.s. military aid to egypt. not all aid will be suspended. but information from u.s. officials that some military aid to egypt will be suspended. certain things will be exempted, counterterrorism aid, security in the sinai peninsula. we've also been told that the egyptians have not yet been notified. this is a decision that the administration has been struggling with for some time. it's been pushed back a number of times. just to be clear, the u.s. aid relationship with egypt will continue. it's about $1.5 billion a year which encompasses other things beyond military aid. s economic aid, for instance. but still, anderson, a significant decision affecting one of the longest-standing u.s.
10:45 pm
relationships in the region, one of the longest-standing aid relationships in the region and one that we'll be following very closely in the coming days. >> bottom line from the information you now have, some u.s. military aid, not all u.s. military aid. >> reporter: some, a significant portion. some things being accepted for instance counterterrorism. but still a significant move. >> jim sciutto, appreciate the update. our panel takes on the washington redskins controversy next. ready to run your lines?
10:46 pm
okay, who helps you focus on your recovery? yo, yo, yo. aflac. wow. [ under his breath ] that was horrible. pays you cash when you're sick or hurt? [ japanese accent ] aflac. love it. [ under his breath ] hate it. helps you focus on getting back to normal?
10:47 pm
[ as a southern belle ] aflac. [ as a cowboy ] aflac. [ sassily ] aflac. uh huh. [ under his breath ] i am so fired. you're on in 5, duck. [ male announcer ] when you're sick or hurt, aflac pays you cash. find out more at icaused by acid reflux disease, relieving heartburn, hurt, aflac pays you cash. relief is at hand. for many, nexium provides 24-hour heartburn relief and may be available for just $18 a month. there is risk of bone fracture and low magnesium levels. side effects may include headache, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. if you have persistent diarrhea, contact your doctor right away. other serious stomach conditions may exist. don't take nexium if you take clopidogrel. relief is at hand for just $18 a month. talk to your doctor about nexium.
10:48 pm
10:49 pm
welcome back. native american tribe is asking the nfl to stop using racial slurs as the name of the washington redskins football team. for 80 years the washington redskins has been a team name. "obviously people get attached to team names. mascots. i don't think there are any red skin fans that mean offense. i've got to say if i were the owner of a team and i knew that there was a name of my team, even if it had a storied history that was offending a sizeable
10:50 pm
group of people, i'd think about changing it." but i don't want to detract from the wonderful redskins fans that are here. they love their team. back with our panel and on the phone, lanny, an attorney for the washington redskins. lanny, do you believe this term is offensive? redskins? and why not change it if it is? >> well, first of all, sorry i can't be with this great panel. i wish i could have joined you, anderson. and secondly, i do understand that's offensive to some native americans. and the redskins respect that. and regret that. but we have overwhelming love as fans i speak now as a red skin fan. love of a team. and we don't have any intent to disrespect or disparage. the only data that we can come up with is both anecdotal and statistical. anna is a great pollster. and she knows the annenberg
10:51 pm
institute. the only poll ever taken of 30,000 people. 1,000 of them randomly selected identified as native americans found nine out of ten were not taking offense to the name redskins. the atlanta braves have a tomahawk chop. the cleveland indians, the world indian is very offensive to native americans. i think what it's all about, the fans who love those teams are the reason why we fans love the redskins. there's no racial intent here. >> okay. >> and we just love the team. but they're sensitive and we're aware some people are offended. we hope we can reach out to them. [ overlapping speakers ] >> lanny, you know that redskin is a completely different type of epithet than chief or indian or brave or blackhawk. redskin is a slur. let me ask you this, lanny. remember there used to be a restaurant chain called sambo's. and you know, basically, people didn't think about it just like they didn't think about redskins for a long time.
10:52 pm
eventually people realized you can't have a restaurant change in the united states called sambo's. it's derogatory. isn't it time for the redskins to recognize it's the same thing? it's wrong to have a name like that. >> you know, i hate in a historic moment they would ever disagree with jeffrey toobin on anything. but jeff, if you ask native americans are you offended by the word "indians" they didn't come from india. we're calling them native americans tonight on the show because we don't say "indians" anymore. >> that's not true. a lot of native americans don't mind indian. >> the focus is on the redskins and the cleveland indians. it's about a sports team. we mean no offense. i take your point. some people are offended. but the only data we have, and in virginia the virginia tribes are uniformly against changing the name. >> but there are other tribes against it. >> most native americans. and most americans, nine out of ten native americans, eight out of nine in 2013, jeff, all
10:53 pm
americans say don't change the name. >> lanny will correct me if i'm wrong, i think the polling he's referring to is many years old. >> the poll is from 2004. >> it's so old, i don't know it should be brought up. lanny keeps saying no harm is meant. i don't know that intentions are what we're talking about here. we're talking about effects. if harm is taken i don't think it matters if no harm is meant. >> i come from a minority group. i'm a minority group. so i can be a squish about this political correctness and not offending people. and i was feeling that way this morning until i read this piece by rick riley who's an espn writer. of course, i know nothing about sports so you just told me he is a very well-known writer. okay. and he is married to a woman whose father is a blackfeet indian. he's a member of that. he doesn't mind it. then he goes on to talk about two high schools, one in oklahoma, one in washington state, one has 92% native american population, the other
10:54 pm
one has 52%. and what is their football team at their high schools called? the redskins. >> but a lot of colleges have already made these changes. the fighting illini. >> dartmouth and stan forwards used to be known as the indians. they changed their name. >> the word doesn't get repeated in the media all the time. >> i keep thinking and i fully accept if people find it offensive, but i just keep thinking of the invictus film. the rugby team. i know it's different, but in south africa they were the symbol of white south africa. and many black south africans considered the rugby team with their all-white team and their jerseys to be a symbol of oppression and apartheid. it took nelson mandela to walk out on to the pitch during the world cup of rugby, with the jersey on and go and shake each man's hand and reconcile right there and then.
10:55 pm
and that sort of solved it. i mean, you can deal with it in different ways. >> that's the tradition of the sport. that was a sport which wasn't popular among black south africans. >> it was popular. it was a symbol of white racist oppression. >> i want to ask lanny a question. lanny, i'm from florida and there was an issue with the florida seminoles. >> florida state seminoles. >> okay. the caveat i don't know sports. >> the seminoles are actually the name of a native american tribe as opposed to "redskins." and they actually came onboard with the team and actually consulted with the team. the difference is -- i'm not taking a position here. i'm not really a sports fan. but is that this is not a name of a tribe, this is jeff to your point, this is a slur. >> but my point was, what the seminoles did with the university did was reach out to the tribe, negotiate something that was acceptable to them. because they had issues with this thing.
10:56 pm
they do this ritual where a white kid comes out on a horse pretending to be an indian. >> we've got to leave it there. lanny davis, appreciate you calling in. thank you very much. our conversation continues. we'll be right back. customer erin swenson ordered shoes from us online but they didn't fit. customer's not happy, i'm not happy. sales go down, i'm not happy. merch comes back, i'm not happy. use ups. they make returns easy. unhappy customer becomes happy customer. then, repeat customer. easy returns, i'm happy. repeat customers, i'm happy. sales go up, i'm happy. i ordered another pair. i'm happy. (both) i'm happy. i'm happy. happy. happy. happy. happy. happy happy. i love logistics. losing thrusters. i need more power. give me more power! [ mainframe ] located. ge deep-sea fuel technology. a 50,000-pound, ingeniously wired machine that optimizes raw data to help safely discover and maximize resources in extreme conditions.
10:57 pm
our current situation seems rather extreme. why can't we maximize our... ready. ♪ brilliant. let's get out of here. warp speed. ♪ store and essentially they just get sold something. we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. before you invest in a mattress, discover the bed clinically proven to improve sleep quality. once you experience it, there's no going back. oh, yeah! at our columbus day event, save $500 to $700 dollars on the final closeout of our performance series mattress sets. but hurry-ends soon! only at a sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699.99. sleep number. comfort individualized to find you a great deal, even if it's not with us. [ ding ] oh, that's helpful! well, our company does that, too. actually, we invented that.
10:58 pm
it's like a sauna in here. helping you save, even if it's not with us -- now, that's progressive! call or click today. no mas pantalones!
10:59 pm
welcome back. at this point we usually have the what's your story segment.
11:00 pm
we ran out of time tonight because frankly once sonny hostin and mark geragos got going it's virtually impossible to get them to stop talking. >> you completely lost control of your show. >> i know. >> it's been a long day. >> that's it for "ac "outfront" next. they say talk is cheap. >> we're not going on negotiate around the debt ceiling. >> there will be a negotiation. >> but will hitting the debt ceiling be catastrophic? we separate fact from fear. plus, fly boy. >> i don't have that. >> we know who the 9-year-old boy was who snuck on to a flight to vegas. and an undercover police officer said he arrived on the scene after a violent confrontation between bikers and a driver. but the video shows that might be a lie. let's go "outfront."